Abbenes, J.G.J., Slings, S.R., and Sluiter, I. eds. 1995. Greek Literary Theory after Aristotle. A Collection of Papers in Honour of D.M. Schenkeveld. Amsterdam.Google Scholar

Ando, C. 1999. ‘Was Rome a polis?’ Classical Antiquity 18: 5–34.Google Scholar

Andrén, A. 1960. ‘Dionysius of Halicarnassus on Roman monuments.’ In Hommages à Léon Herrmann. Collection Latomus 44. Brussels. 88–104.Google Scholar

Appiah, A.K. 2016. ‘There Is No Such Thing as Western Civilization.’ The Guardian. 6 November.Google Scholar

Arendt, H. 1968. Men in Dark Times. New York.Google Scholar

Armstrong, D. 1993. ‘The Addressees of the Ars Poetica: Herculaneum, the Pisones, and Epicurean Protreptic.’ Materiali e Discussioni 31: 185–230.Google Scholar

Armstrong, D. 1995. ‘The Impossibility of Metathesis: Philodemus and Lucretius on Form and Content in Poetry.’ In Obbink 1995: 210–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Armstrong, D. 2004. ‘Horace’s Epistles 1 and Philodemus.’ In Armstrong-Fish-Johnston-Skinner, 2004: 267–98.Google Scholar

Armstrong, D. and Oberhelman, S. 1995. ‘Satire as Poetry and the Impossibility of Metathesis in Horace’s Satires.’ In Obbink, 1995: 233–54.Google Scholar

Armstrong, D., Fish, J., Johnston, P.A., and Skinner, M.B. eds. 2004. Vergil, Philodemus, and the Augustans. Austin.Google Scholar

Asheri, D., Lloyd, A., and Corcella, A. 2007. A Commentary on Herodotus Books I-IV. Oxford.Google Scholar

Aujac, G. 1978. Denys d’Halicarnasse: Opuscules rhétoriques. Tome 1. Paris.Google Scholar

Aujac, G. 1988. Denys d’Halicarnasse: Opuscules rhétoriques. Tome 2. Paris.Google Scholar

Aujac, G. 1991. Denys d’Halicarnasse: Opuscules rhétoriques. Tome 4. Paris.Google Scholar

Aujac, G. 1992. Denys d’Halicarnasse: Opuscules rhétoriques. Tome 5. Paris.Google Scholar

Aujac, G. and Lebel, M. 1981. Denys d’Halicarnasse: Opuscules rhétoriques. Tome 3. Paris.Google Scholar

Avenarius, G. 1956. Lukians Schrift zur Geschichtschreibung. Meisenheim am Glan.Google Scholar

Badian, E. 1966. ‘The Early Historians.’ In Latin Historians, ed. Dorey, T.A.. London. 1–38.Google Scholar

Baragwanath, E. 2008. Motivation and Narrative in Herodotus. Oxford.Google Scholar

Baraz, J. 2012. A Written Republic: Cicero’s Philosophical Politics. Princeton.Google Scholar

Barchiesi, A. 2009. ‘Roman Perspectives on the Greeks.’ In The Oxford Handbook of Hellenic Studies, ed. Boys-Stones, G., Graziosi, B., and Vasunia, Ph. Oxford. 98–113.Google Scholar

Baronowski, D.W. 2011. Polybius and Roman Imperialism. London.Google Scholar

Battisti, D.G. 1997. Dionigi di Alicarnasso: Sull’imitazione. Pisa.Google Scholar

Batstone, W.W. 2009. ‘Postmodern Historiographical Theory and the Roman Historians.’ In The Cambridge Companion to the Roman Historians, ed. Feldherr, A.. Cambridge. 24–40.Google Scholar

Bauman, R.A. 1993. ‘The Rape of Lucretia, “Quod metus causa” and the Criminal Law.’ Latomus 52: 550–66.Google Scholar

Beard, M., North, J., and Price, S. eds. 1998. Religions of Rome. 2 vols. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Bencivenni, A. 2014. ‘The King’s Words: Hellenistic Royal Letters in Inscriptions.’ In State Correspondence in the Ancient World: From New Kingdom Egypt to the Roman Empire, ed. Radner, K.. Oxford. 141–71.Google Scholar

Benediktson, D.T. 2000. Literature and the Visual Arts in Ancient Greece and Rome. Norman.Google Scholar

Bhabha, H. 1994. The Location of Culture. London.Google Scholar

Bishop, C. 2015. ‘How to Make a Roman Demosthenes: Self-Fashioning in Cicero’s Brutus and Orator.’ Classical Journal 111: 167–92.Google Scholar

Bocksch, O. 1895. ‘De fontibus librorum v et vi Antiquitatum Romanarum Dionysii Halicarnassensis quaestiones variae.’ Leipziger Studien zur classischen Philologie 17: 165–274.Google Scholar

Bonner, S.F. 1938. ‘Dionysius of Halicarnassus and the Peripatetic Mean of Style.’ Classical Philology 33: 257–66.Google Scholar

Bonner, S.F. 1939. The Literary Treatises of Dionysius of Halicarnassus. A Study in the Development of Critical Method. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Bowersock, G.W. 1965. Augustus and the Greek World. Oxford.Google Scholar

Bowersock, G.W. 1979. ‘Historical Problems in Late Republican and Augustan Classicism.’ In Flashar, 1979a: 57–78.Google Scholar

Bremmer, J. 1997. ‘Why did Medea Kill her Brother Apsyrtus?’ In Medea: Essays on Medea in Myth, Literature, Philosophy, and Art, ed. Clauss, J.J. and Johnston, S.I.. Princeton. 83–100.Google Scholar

Brink, C.O. 1963. Horace on Poetry. Prolegomena to the Literary Epistles. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Brink, C.O. 1971. Horace on Poetry. The ‘Ars Poetica.’ Cambridge.Google Scholar

Briquel, D. 1984. Les Pélasges en Italie. Rome.Google Scholar

Briquel, D. 1993. Les Tyrrhènes, peuple des Tours. Rome.Google Scholar

Briquel, D. 2004. ‘La chute des décemvirs: aux origines d’un récit.’ In Images d’Origines. Origines d’une Image. Hommages à Jacques Poucet, ed. Deproost, P.-A. and Meurant, A.. Leuven. 139–56.Google Scholar

Brubaker, R. and Cooper, F. 2009. ‘Beyond “identity”.’ Theory and Society 29: 1–47.Google Scholar

Bruns, I. 1896. Das literarische Porträt der Griechen im fünften und vierten Jahrhundert vor Christi Geburt. Berlin.Google Scholar

Büchler, O. 1936. Die Unterscheidung der redenden Personen bei Lysias: eine stilistische Untersuchung der διήγησις. Heidelberg.Google Scholar

Bundrick, S.D. 2008. ‘The Fabric of the City: Imaging Textile Production in Classical Athens.’ Hesperia 77: 283–334.Google Scholar

Burck, E. 1964 ². Die Erzählungskunst des T. Livius. Berlin. [first edition 1934]Google Scholar

Bux, E. 1915. Das Probouleuma bei Dionys von Halikarnaß. Dissertation. Leipzig.Google Scholar

Calboli, G. 1987. ‘Asianesimo e Atticismo: retorica, letteratura e linguistica.’ In Studi di retorica oggi in Italia. Bologna. 31–53.Google Scholar

Camps, W.A. 1969. An Introduction to Virgil’s Aeneid. London.Google Scholar

Canfora, L. 2006. ‘Thucydides in Rome and Late Antiquity.’ In Brill’s Companion to Thucydides, ed. Rengakos, A. and Tsakmakis, A.. Leiden. 721–53.Google Scholar

Cantarella, E. 1991. ‘Homicides of Honor. The Development of Italian Adultery Law over Two Millennia.’ In The Family in Italy from Antiquity to the Present, ed. Kertzer, D.I. and Saller, R.P.. New Haven. 229–44.Google Scholar

Carter, P. 1992. Living in a New Country: History, Travelling, and Language. London.Google Scholar

Cary, E. 1937. The Roman Antiquities of Dionysius of Halicarnassus. Vol. 1. Cambridge, MA. 1937.Google Scholar

Cary, E. 1939. The Roman Antiquities of Dionysius of Halicarnassus. Vol. 2. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Cary, E. 1940. The Roman Antiquities of Dionysius of Halicarnassus. Vol. 3. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Cary, E. 1943. The Roman Antiquities of Dionysius of Halicarnassus. Vol. 4. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Cary, E. 1945. The Roman Antiquities of Dionysius of Halicarnassus. Vol. 5. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Cary, E. 1947. The Roman Antiquities of Dionysius of Halicarnassus. Vol. 6. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Cary, E. 1950. The Roman Antiquities of Dionysius of Halicarnassus. Vol. 7. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Chambers, I. 1994. Migrancy, Culture, Identity. London.Google Scholar

Champion, C.B. 2004. Cultural Politics in Polybius’s Histories. Berkeley.Google Scholar

Chaniotis, A. 2016. ‘History as an Argument in Hellenistic Oratory: The Evidence of Hellenistic Decrees.’ In La Rhétorique du Pouvoir. Une exploration de l’art oratoire délibératif grec. Entretiens sur l’antiquité classique 62, ed. Edwards, M.. Vandoevres. 129–74.Google Scholar

Chiron, P. 1993. Démétrios: Du style. Paris.Google Scholar

Chaplin, J.D. 2000. Livy’s Exemplary History. Oxford.Google Scholar

Chiron, P. 2010. ‘Les noms du style chez Démétrios (Ps.-Démétrios de Phalère): collection ou système?’ In Chiron-Lévy, 2010: 71–85.Google Scholar

Chiron, P. and Lévy, C. ed. 2010. Les noms du style dans l’antiquité Gréco-Latin. Louvain.Google Scholar

Closterman, W.E. 2014. ‘Women as Gift Givers and Gift Producers in Ancient Athenian Funerary Ritual.’ In Approaching the Ancient Artifact: Representation, Narrative, and Function. A Festschrift in Honor of H. Alan Shapiro, ed. Avramidou, A. and Demetriou, D.. Berlin. 161–74.Google Scholar

Coetzee, J.M. 2003. Elizabeth Costello. New York.Google Scholar

Cohen, D. 1991a. ‘The Augustan Law on Adultery: The Social and Cultural Context.’ In The Family in Italy from Antiquity to the Present, ed. Kertzer, D.I. and Saller, R.P.. New Haven. 109–26.Google Scholar

Cohen, D. 1991b. ‘Sexuality, Violence, and the Athenian Law of Hubris.’ Greece and Rome 38: 171–88.Google Scholar

Connolly, J. 2007. ‘Being Greek / Being Roman: Hellenism and Assimilation in the Roman Empire.’ Millennium Jahrbuch zu Kultur und Geschichte des ersten Jahrtausends n. Chr. 4: 21–42.Google Scholar

Connolly, J. 2018a. ‘The Space between Subjects.’ In Marginality, Canonicity, Passion, ed. Formisano, M. and Kraus, C.S.. Oxford. 313–28.Google Scholar

Connolly, J. 2018b. ‘The Promise of the Classical Canon: Hannah Arendt and the Romans.’ Classical Philology 113: 6-19.Google Scholar

Conte, G.B. 1994. Latin Literature. A History. Baltimore.Google Scholar

Conte, G.B. 2007. The Poetry of Pathos. Studies in Virgilian Epic. Oxford.Google Scholar

Cornell, T.J. 1995. The Beginnings of Rome: Italy and Rome from the Bronze Age to the Punic Wars. London.Google Scholar

Cornell, T.J. ed. 2013. The Fragments of the Roman Historians. Oxford.Google Scholar

Dainotti, P. 2015. Word Order and Expressiveness in the ‘Aeneid.’ Berlin.Google Scholar

Damon, C. 1991. ‘Aesthetic Response and Technical Analysis in the Rhetorical Writings of Dionysius of Halicarnassus.’ Museum Helveticum 48: 33–58.Google Scholar

Degrassi, A. 1947. Inscriptiones Italiae. Volumen XIII – Fasti et elogia. Fasciculus 1 – Fasti consulares et triumphales. Rome.Google Scholar

Delcourt, A. 2005. Lecture des Antiquités Romaines de Denys d’Halicarnasse. Un historien entre deux mondes. Brussels.Google Scholar

Dewald, C. 1987. ‘Narrative Surface and Authorial Voice in Herodotus’ Histories.’ In Herodotus and the Invention of History, ed. Boedeker, D. and Peradotto, J.. Arethusa 20: 147–70.Google Scholar

Dewald, C. 2002. ‘“I Didn’t Give My Own Genealogy”: Herodotus and the Authorial Persona.’ In Brill’s Companion to Herodotus, ed. Bakker, E.J., Jong, I.J.F., and Wees, H.. Leiden. 267–89.Google Scholar

Dixon, S. 2001. ‘Women’s Work: Perceptions of Public and Private.’ In Reading Roman Women. London. 113–32.Google Scholar

Dolar, M. 2006. A Voice and Nothing More. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Donadi, F. 1986. ‘Il “bello” e il “piacere” (osservazioni sul De compositione verborum di Dionigi d’ Alicarnasso).’ Studi Italiani di Filologia Classica 4: 42–63.Google Scholar

Donadi, F. and Marchiori, A. 2014. Dionigi d’Alicarnasso. La composizione stilistica. Trieste.Google Scholar

Drerup, E. 1923. Demosthenes im Urteile des Altertums. Würzburg.Google Scholar

Drossaart Lulofs, H.J. 1965. Nicolaus Damascenus on the Philosophy of Aristotle. Fragments of the First Five Books Translated from the Syriac with an Introduction and Commentary. Leiden.Google Scholar

Dueck, D. 2000. Strabo of Amasia: A Greek Man of Letters in Augustan Rome. London.Google Scholar

Earl, D.C. 1961. The Political Thought of Sallust. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Eden, K. 1986. Poetic and Legal Fiction in the Aristotelian Tradition. Princeton.Google Scholar

Edwards, C. 1993. The Politics of Immorality in Ancient Rome. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Edwards, M.J. 2013a. ‘Hypokrites in Action: Delivery in Greek Rhetoric.’ In Profession and Performance: Aspects of Oratory in the Greco-Roman World, ed. Kremmydas, C., Powell, J., and Rubinstein, L.. London. 15–25.Google Scholar

Edwards, M.J. 2013b. ‘Dionysius and Isaeus.’ In Kremmydas-Tempest 2013: 43–9.Google Scholar

Egger, M. 1902. Denys d’Halicarnasse: Essai sur la critique littéraire et la rhétorique chez les Grecs du siècle d’Auguste. Paris.Google Scholar

Ek, S. 1942. Herodotismen in der Archäologie des Dionys von Halikarnass. Ein Beitrag zur Beleuchtung des beginnenden Klassizismus. Lund.Google Scholar

Eliot, T.S. 1923. ‘The Function of Criticism.’ Criterion 1: 31–42.Google Scholar

Elsner, J. 2007. Roman Eyes. Visuality and Subjectivity in Art and Text. Princeton.Google Scholar

Erker, D.S. 2009. ‘Women’s Tears in Ancient Roman Ritual.’ In Tears in the Graeco-Roman World, ed. T. Fögen. Berlin. 135–60.Google Scholar

Evrigennis, I.D. 2008. Fear of Enemies and Collective Action. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Fairclough, H.R. 1926. Horace: Satires, Epistles and Ars Poetica. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Fantasia, U. 2004. ‘ἀκρίβεια.’ In Lexicon Historiographicum Graecum et Latinum I, ed. Ampolo, C., Fantasia, U., and Porciani, L.. Pisa. 36–66.Google Scholar

Fantham, E. 1991. ‘Stuprum: Public Attitudes and Penalties for Sexual Offences in Republican Rome.’ Échos du Monde Classique 35: 267–91.Google Scholar

Fantham, E. 1997. ‘The Contexts and Occasions of Roman Public Rhetoric.’ In Roman Eloquence, ed. Dominik, W.J.. London. 91–105.Google Scholar

Feeney, D. 2016. Beyond Greek: The Beginnings of Latin Literature. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Feldherr, A. 1997. ‘Livy’s Revolution: Civic Identity and the Creation of the res publica.’ In The Roman Cultural Revolution, ed. Habinek, T. and Schiesaro, A.. Cambridge. 136–57.Google Scholar

Feldherr, A. 1998. Spectacle and Society in Livy’s History. Berkeley.Google Scholar

Ferrari, G. 2002. Figures of Speech: Men and Maidens in Ancient Greece. Chicago.Google Scholar

Fisher, N.R.E. 1992. Hybris: A Study in the Values of Honour and Shame in Ancient Greece. Warminster.Google Scholar

Flashar, H. ed. 1979a. Le classicisme à Rome aux 1ers siècles avant et après J.-C. Entretiens sur l’antiquité classique 25. Vandoeuvres-Geneva.Google Scholar

Flashar, H. 1979b. ‘Die klassizistische Theorie der Mimesis.’ In Flashar, 1979a: 79–111.Google Scholar

Fornara, C.W. 1983. The Nature of History in Ancient Greece and Rome. Berkeley.Google Scholar

Fornaro, S. 1997. Dionisio di Alicarnasso: Epistola a Pompeo Gemino. Introduzione e commento. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Forsythe, G. 1999. Livy and Early Rome: A Study in Historical Method and Judgement. Historia Einzelschriften 132. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Fortenbaugh, W.W. 2005. Theophrastus of Eresus. Sources for His Life, Writings, Thought and Influence. Commentary Volume 8. Sources on Rhetoric and Poetics (Texts 666–713). Leiden.Google Scholar

Foster, E. and Lateiner, D. eds. 2012. ‘Introduction.’ In Herodotus and Thucydides. Oxford. 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fox, M. 1993. ‘History and Rhetoric in Dionysius of Halicarnassus.’ Journal of Roman Studies 83: 31–47.Google Scholar

Fox, M. 1996. Roman Historical Myths: The Regal Period in Augustan Literature. Oxford.Google Scholar

Fox, M. 2001. ‘Dionysius, Lucian, and the Prejudice against Rhetoric in History.’ Journal of Roman Studies 91: 76–93.Google Scholar

Fox, M. 2011. ‘The Style of the Past: Dionysius of Halicarnassus in Context.’ In Schmitz-Wiater 2011a: 93–114.Google Scholar

Fox, M. and Livingstone, N. 2010. ‘Rhetoric and Historiography.’ In A Companion to Greek Rhetoric, ed. Worthington, I. Malden, MA. 542–61.Google Scholar

Freudenburg, K. 1993. The Walking Muse. Horace on the Theory of Satire. Princeton.Google Scholar

Frischer, B. 1991. Shifting Paradigms. New Approaches to Horace’s Ars Poetica. Atlanta.Google Scholar

Fromentin, V. 1993. ‘La définition de l’histoire comme “mélange” dans le prologue des Antiquités Romaines de Denys d’Halicarnasse.’ Pallas 39: 177–92.Google Scholar

Fromentin, V. 1998. Denys d’Halicarnasse: Antiquités Romaines. Tome 1. Paris.Google Scholar

Fromentin, V. 2003. ‘Fondements et crises de la royauté à Rome: les règnes de Servius Tullius et de Tarquin le Superbe chez Tite-Live et Denys d’Halicarnasse.’ In Fondements et crises du pouvoir, ed. Franchet d’Espèrey, S., Fromentin, V., Gotteland, S., and Roddaz, J.-M.. Pessac. 69–82.Google Scholar

Fromentin, V. 2004. ‘Choisir le meilleur: la royauté élective à Rome selon Denys d’Halicarnasse.’ Ktèma 29: 312–23.Google Scholar

Fromentin, V. 2006. ‘Denys d’Halicarnasse et Hérodote III, 80–82 ou Comment choisir la meilleure constitution pour politique Rome?’ Pallas 72: 229–42.Google Scholar

Fuhrer, Th. 2003. ‘Was ist gute Dichtung? Horaz und der poetologische Diskurs seiner Zeit.’ Rheinisches Museum 146: 346–64.Google Scholar

Gabba, E. 1979. ‘Eduard Schwartz e la storiografia greca dell’età imperiale.’ Annali della Scuola Normale di Pisa 9: 1033–49.Google Scholar

Gabba, E. 1991. Dionysius and The History of Archaic Rome. Berkeley.Google Scholar

Gabba, E. 1994. ‘Per Dionigi d’Alicarnasso.’ Athenaeum 82: 496–7.Google Scholar

Gaida, E. 1934. Die Schlachtschilderung in den Antiquitates Romanae des Dionys von Halikarnass. Dissertation. Breslau.Google Scholar

Galinsky, K. 1996. Augustan Culture: An Interpretive Introduction. Princeton.Google Scholar

Galinsky, K. 2005a. The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Augustus. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Galinsky, K. 2005b. ‘Vergil’s Aeneid and Ovid’s Metamorphoses as World Literature.’ In Galinsky, 2005a: 340–60.Google Scholar

Gantz, T. 1975. ‘The Tarquin Dynasty.’ Historia 24: 539–54.Google Scholar

Garland, R. 1985. The Greek Way of Death. Ithaca.Google Scholar

Gaughan, J.E. 2012. Murder Was Not a Crime: Homicide and Power in the Roman Republic. Austin.Google Scholar

Geigenmueller, P. 1908. Quaestiones Dionysianae de vocabulis artis criticae. Dissertation. Leipzig.Google Scholar

Gelzer, Th. 1975. ‘Klassik und Klassizismus.’ Gymnasium 82: 147–73.Google Scholar

Gelzer, Th. 1979. ‘Klassizismus, Attizismus und Asianismus.’ In Flashar, 1979a: 1–55.Google Scholar

Gerber, D.E. 1982. Pindar’s Olympian One: A Commentary. Toronto.Google Scholar

Gildenhard, I. 2007. Paideia Romana: Cicero’s Tusculan Disputations. Cambridge Philological Society Supplements 30. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Glissant, E. 1997. Poetics of Relation. Ann Arbor.Google Scholar

Glucker, J. 1978. Antiochus and the Late Academy. Hypomnemata 56. Göttingen.Google Scholar

Görler, W. 1979. ‘“Ex Verbis Communibus ΚΑΚΟΖΗΛΙΑ”. Die augusteischen “Klassiker” und die griechischen Theoretiker des Klassisizmus.’ In Flashar, 1979a: 175–211.Google Scholar

Goldhill, S. ed. 2001. Being Greek Under Rome. Cultural Identity, the Second Sophistic and the Development of Empire. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Goudriaan, K. 1989. Over classicisme. Dionysius van Halicarnassus en zijn program van welsprekendheid, cultuur en politiek. Dissertation. Free University Amsterdam.Google Scholar

Gow, A.S.F. and Page, D.L. 1968. The Greek Anthology. The Garland of Philip and Some Contemporary Epigrams. 2 vols. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Gowers, E. 2012. Horace: Satires, Book I. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Gozzoli, S. 1976. ‘Polibio e Dionigi d’Alicarnasso.’ Studi Classici e Orientali 25: 149–76.Google Scholar

Gransden, K.W. 1976. Virgil: Aeneid, Book VIII. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Greenwood, E. 2010. ‘Mimicry and Classical Allusion in V.S. Naipaul’s The Mimic Men.’ In Classics and National Cultures, ed. Stephens, S.A. and Vasunia, Ph. Oxford. 100–20.Google Scholar

Greenberg, N.A. 1958. ‘Metathesis as an Instrument in the Criticism of Poetry.’ Transactions of the American Philological Association 89: 262–70.Google Scholar

Grethlein, J. 2013. Experience and Teleology in Ancient Historiography: ‘Futures Past’ from Herodotus to Augustine. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Griffin, M.T. 1989. ‘Philosophy, Politics, and Politicians.’ In Philosophia Togata: Essays on Philosophy and Roman Society 1, ed. Griffin, M.T. and Barnes, J.. Oxford. 1–37.Google Scholar

Griffiths, A.H. 2013. ‘Where Did Early Roman History Come From?’ Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 56: 79–87.Google Scholar

Grube, G.M.A. 1950. ‘Dionysius of Halicarnassus on Thucydides.’ Phoenix 4: 95–110.Google Scholar

Grube, G.M.A. 1961. A Greek Critic: Demetrius On Style. Toronto.Google Scholar

Grube, G.M.A. 1965. The Greek and Roman Critics. London.Google Scholar

Halbfas, F. 1910. Theorie und Praxis in der Geschichtsschreibung bei Dionys von Halikarnass. Dissertation. Münster.Google Scholar

Hall, J. 2007. ‘Oratorical Delivery and the Emotions: Theory and Practice.’ In A Companion to Roman Rhetoric, ed. Dominik, W.J.. Malden, MA. 218–34.Google Scholar

Hallett, C.M. 2012. ‘The Archaic Style in Sculpture in the Eyes of Ancient and Modern Viewers.’ In Making Sense of Greek Art, ed. Coltman, V.. Exeter. 70–100.Google Scholar

Halliwell, S. 2002. The Aesthetics of Mimesis: Ancient Texts and Modern Problems. Princeton.Google Scholar

Halliwell, S. 2011. Between Ecstasy and Truth. Interpretations of Greek Poetics from Homer to Longinus. Oxford.Google Scholar

Halliwell, S., Fyfe, W.H., Russell, D.A., and Innes, D.C. eds. 1995. Aristotle, Poetics. Longinus, On the Sublime. Demetrius, On Style. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Hansen, M.H. and Nielsen, T.H. eds. 2004. An Inventory of Archaic and Classical Poleis. Oxford.Google Scholar

Hardie, P. 2014. ‘The Ars Poetica and the Poetics of Didactic.’ Materiali e Discussioni 72: 43–54.Google Scholar

Harris, W.V. 1986. ‘The Roman Father’s Power of Life and Death.’ In Studies in Roman Law in Memory of A. Arthur Schiller, ed. Bagnall, R.S. and Harris, W.V.. Leiden. 81–95.Google Scholar

Harrison, J.R. 2003. Paul’s Language of Grace in Its Graeco-Roman Context. Tübingen.Google Scholar

Hartog, F. 1991. ‘Rome et la Grèce.’ In ἙΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΣ: Quelques jalons pour une histoire de l’identité grecque, ed. Saïd, S.. Leiden. 149–67.Google Scholar

Heath, J. 2005. The Talking Greeks: Speech, Animals, and the Other in Homer, Aeschylus, and Plato. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Heath, M. 1989. Unity in Greek Poetics. Oxford.Google Scholar

Heldmann, K. 1982. Antike Theorien über Entwicklung und Verfall der Redekunst. Munich.Google Scholar

Hellegouarc’h, J. 1972. Le Vocabulaire latin des relations et des partis politiques sous la République. Paris.Google Scholar

Hemelrijk, E.A. 2004. ‘Masculinity and Femininity in the Laudatio Turiae.’ Classical Quarterly 54: 185–97.Google Scholar

Henderson, J. 2001. ‘From Megalopolis to Cosmopolis.’ In Goldhill, 2001: 29–49.Google Scholar

Hendrickson, G.L. 1905. ‘The Origin and Meaning of the Ancient Characters of Style.’ American Journal of Philology 26: 249–90.Google Scholar

Henrichs, A. 1978. ‘Greek Maenadism from Olympias to Messalina.’ Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 82: 121–60.Google Scholar

Hidber, Th. 1996. Das klassizistische Manifest des Dionys von Halikarnass. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Hidber, Th. 2011. ‘Impacts of Writing in Rome: Greek Authors and Their Roman Environment in the First Century BCE.’ In Schmitz-Wiater, 2011a: 115–23.Google Scholar

Hill, H. 1961. ‘Dionysius of Halicarnassus and the Origins of Rome.’ Journal of Roman Studies 51: 88–93.Google Scholar

Hölscher, T. 2004. The Language of Images in Roman Art. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Hogg, D. 2008. Speech and Action in the Antiquitates Romanae of Dionysius of Halicarnassus: The Question of Historical Change. DPhil thesis. Oxford (open access https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid%3A30012af0-0ba8-46cd-a9d8-d53d8d3f73c1).Google Scholar

Hogg, D. 2013. ‘The Decemvirate.’ In The Encyclopaedia of Ancient History, ed. Bagnall, R.S., Broderson, K., Champion, C., Erskine, A. and Hübner, S.. Vol. 4. Malden, MA. 1947–8.Google Scholar

Holder, A. 1967. Pomponi Porfyrionis Commentum in Horatium Flaccum. Hildesheim.Google Scholar

Hornblower, S. 1987. Thucydides. London.Google Scholar

Hornblower, S. 2008. A Commentary on Thucydides. Vol. III. Oxford.Google Scholar

Horsfall, N. 1995. A Companion to the Study of Virgil. Leiden.Google Scholar

Hunter, R. 2003. ‘Reflecting on Writing and Culture: Theocritus and the Style of Cultural Change.’ In Written Texts and the Rise of Literate Culture in Ancient Greece, ed. Yunis, H.. Cambridge. 213–34 (= Hunter 2008: vol. 1, 434–56).Google Scholar

Hunter, R. 2007. ‘Sappho and Latin Poetry.’ In I papiri di Saffo e di Alceo: atti del convegno internazionale di studi, Firenze, 8–9 giugno 2006, ed. Bastianini, G. and Casanova, A.. Florence. 213–25.Google Scholar

Hunter, R. 2008. On Coming After: Studies in Post-Classical Greek Literature and Its Reception. Berlin.Google Scholar

Hunter, R. 2009. Critical Moments in Classical Literature. Studies in the Ancient View of Literature and Its Uses. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Hunter, R. 2012. Plato and the Traditions of Ancient Literature: The Silent Stream. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Hunter, R. 2014. ‘Attic Comedy in the Rhetorical and Moralizing Traditions.’ In The Cambridge Companion to Greek Comedy, ed. Revermann, M.. Cambridge. 373–86.Google Scholar

Hurst, A. 1982. ‘Un critique grec dans la Rome d’Auguste: Denys d’Halicarnasse.’ In Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt 2.30.1: 839–65.Google Scholar

Immisch, O. 1925. Bemerkungen zur Schrift vom Erhabenen. Heidelberg.Google Scholar

Immisch, O. 1932. Horazens Epistel über die Dichtkunst. Leipzig.Google Scholar

Innes, D.C. 1985. ‘Theophrastus and the Theory of Style.’ In Theophrastus of Eresus: On His Life and Work, ed. Fortenbaugh, W.W., Huby, P.M., and Long, A.A.. New Brunswick. 251–67.Google Scholar

Innes, D.C. 1995. ‘Longinus: Structure and Unity.’ In Abbenes-Slings-Sluiter, 1995: 111–24.Google Scholar

Innes, D.C. 2002. ‘Longinus and Caecilius: Models of the Sublime.’ Mnemosyne 55: 259–84.Google Scholar

Jacobs, J. 2010. ‘From Sallust to Silius Italicus: Metus hostilis and the Fall of Rome in the Punica.’ In Latin Historiography and Poetry in the Early Empire, ed. Miller, J.F. and Woodman, A.J.. Leiden. 123–40.Google Scholar

Jahn, O. and Kroll, W. 1964. Cicero, Brutus. 7th edn. rev. by Kytzler, B.. Berlin.Google Scholar

Janko, R. 2000. Philodemus: On Poems, Book 1. Oxford.Google Scholar

Jocelyn, H.D. 1979. ‘Vergilius cacozelus (Donatus, Vita Vergilii 44).’ Papers of the Liverpool Latin Seminar 2: 67–142.Google Scholar

de Jong, I.J.F. 2002. ‘Narrative Unity and Units.’ In Brill’s Companion to Herodotus, ed. Bakker, E.J., de Jong, I.J.F., and van Wees, H.. Leiden. 245–66.Google Scholar

de Jonge, C.C. 2005. ‘Dionysius of Halicarnassus and the Method of Metathesis.’ Classical Quarterly 55: 463–80.Google Scholar

de Jonge, C.C. 2008. Between Grammar and Rhetoric. Dionysius of Halicarnassus on Language, Linguistics and Literature. Leiden.Google Scholar

de Jonge, C.C. 2011. ‘Dionysius of Halicarnassus and the Scholia on Thucydides’ Syntax.’ In Ancient Scholarship and Grammar. Archetypes, Concepts and Contexts, ed. Matthaios, S., Montanari, F., and Rengakos, A.. Berlin. 459–86.Google Scholar

de Jonge, C.C. 2012a. ‘Clever Composition. A Textual Note on Longinus, On the Sublime 40.2.’ Mnemosyne 65: 717–25.Google Scholar

de Jonge, C.C. 2012b. ‘Longinus and Dionysius on the Sublime. Rhetoric and Religious Language.’ American Journal of Philology 133: 271–300.Google Scholar

de Jonge, C.C. 2014a. ‘The Attic Muse and the Asian Harlot: Classicizing Allegories in Dionysius and Longinus.’ In Valuing the Past in the Greco-Roman World, ed. Ker, J. and Pieper, C.. Leiden. 388–409.Google Scholar

de Jonge, C.C. 2014b. ‘Ancient Theories of Style (léxis).’ In Encyclopedia of Ancient Greek Language and Linguistics, ed. Giannakis, G.K.. Leiden. 3.326–31.Google Scholar

de Jonge, C.C. 2017. ‘Dionysius of Halicarnassus on Thucydides.’ In The Oxford Handbook of Thucydides, ed. Balot, R., Forsdyke, S., and Foster, E.. Oxford. 641–58.Google Scholar

de Jonge, C.C. 2018. ‘Eumaeus, Evander, and Augustus. Dionysius and Virgil on Noble Simplicity.’ In Homer and the Good Ruler, ed. van den Berg, B. and Klooster, J.J.H.. Leiden. 157-81.Google Scholar

de Jonge, C.C. forthcoming. ‘Linguistic Naturalism and Natural Style. From Varro and Cicero to Dionysius.’ In Language and Nature in Classical Rome, ed. Pezzini, G. and Taylor, B.. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Joshel, S.R. 2002. ‘The Body Female and the Body Politic: Livy’s Lucretia and Verginia.’ In Sexuality and Gender in the Classical World: Readings and Sources, ed. McClure, K.. Oxford. 163–87.Google Scholar

Jost, K. 1936. Das Beispiel und Vorbild der Vorfahren bei den attischen Rednern und Geschichtsschreibern bis Demosthenes. Paderborn.Google Scholar

Kaster, R.A. 2005. Emotion, Restraint, and Community in Ancient Rome. Oxford.Google Scholar

Kellum, B. 2003. ‘Sculptural Programs and Propaganda in Augustan Rome: The Temple of Apollo on the Palatine.’ In Roman Art in Context, ed. D’Ambra, E.. Englewood Cliffs. 75–83.Google Scholar

Kennedy, G. 1972. The Art of Rhetoric in the Roman World. Princeton.Google Scholar

Kierdorf, W. 1980. Laudatio funebris. Interpretationen und Untersuchungen zur Entwicklung der römischen Leichenrede. Meisenheim am Glan.Google Scholar

Kim, L. 2014. ‘Archaizing and Classicism in the Literary Historical Thinking of Dionysius of Halicarnassus.’ In Valuing the Past in the Greco-Roman World, ed. Ker, J. and Pieper, C.. Leiden. 357–87.Google Scholar

Kirchner, R. 2005. ‘Die Mysterien der Rhetorik. Zur Mysterienmetapher in rhetoriktheoretischen Schriften.’ Rheinisches Museum 148: 165–80.Google Scholar

Kleiner, D.E.E. 1993. ‘The Great Friezes of the Ara Pacis Augustae. Greek Sources, Roman Derivatives, Augustan Social Policy.’ In Roman Art in Context, ed. D’Ambra, E.. Englewood Cliffs. 27–52.Google Scholar

Klotz, A. 1938. ‘Zu den Quellen der Archaeologia des Dionysios von Halikarnassos.’ Rheinisches Museum 87: 32–50.Google Scholar

Knauer, G.N. 1964. Die Aeneis und Homer: Studien zur poetischen Technik Vergils mit Listen der Homerzitate in der Aeneis. Göttingen.Google Scholar

Koestermann, E. 1971. C. Sallustius Crispus: Bellum Iugurthinum. Heidelberg.Google Scholar

Kraus, C.S. 1995. Livy: Ab Urbe Condita, Book VI. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Kremmydas, C. and Tempest, K. eds. 2013. Hellenistic Oratory: Continuity and Change. Oxford.Google Scholar

Kurtz, D. 1970. ΑΚΡΙΒΕΙΑ: Das Ideal der Exactheit bei den Griechen bis Aristoteles. Göppinger Akademische Beiträge 8. Göppingen.Google Scholar

Laird, A. 2007. ‘The Ars Poetica.’ In The Cambridge Companion to Horace, ed. Harrison, S.. Cambridge. 132–43.Google Scholar

Lamp, K.S. 2013. A City of Marble: The Rhetoric of Augustan Rome. Columbia.Google Scholar

Langlands, R. 2006. Sexual Morality in Ancient Rome. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Langlands, R. 2014. ‘Exemplary Influences and Augustus’ Pernicious Moral Legacy.’ In Suetonius the Biographer, ed. Power, T. and Gibson, R.K.. Oxford. 111–29.Google Scholar

Larsson Lovén, L. 1998. ‘LANAM FECIT. Woolworking and Female Virtue.’ In Aspects of Women in Antiquity. Proceedings of the first Nordic Symposium on Women’s Lives in Antiquity, ed. Larsson Lovén, L. and Strömberg, A.. Jonsered. 88–95.Google Scholar

Latacz, J. 1966. Zum Wortfeld ‘Freude’ in der Sprache Homers. Heidelberg.Google Scholar

Lausberg, H. 1960. Handbuch der literarischen Rhetorik. Munich.Google Scholar

Lendle, O. 1992. Einführung in die griechische Geschichtsschreibung. Darmstadt.Google Scholar

Lesky, A. 1971. Geschichte der griechischen Literatur. Bern.Google Scholar

Levene, D. 1997. ‘Pity, Fear and the Historical Audience: Tacitus on the Fall of Vitellius.’ In The Passions in Roman Thought and Literature, ed. Braund, S.M. and Gill, C.. Cambridge. 128–49.Google Scholar

Lintott, A.W. 1972. ‘Imperial Expansion and Moral Decline in the Roman Republic.’ Historia 21: 626–38.Google Scholar

Lucarini, C.M. 2015. ‘I due stili asiani (Cic. Br. 325; P.Artemid.) e l’origine dell’atticismo letterario.’ Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 193: 11–24.Google Scholar

Luce, T.J. 1965. ‘The Dating of Livy’s First Decade.’ Transactions of the American Philological Association 96: 209–40.Google Scholar

Luraghi, N. 2003. ‘Dionysios von Halikarnassos zwischen Griechen und Römern.’ In Formen römischer Geschichtsschreibung von den Anfängen bis Livius: Gattungen – Autoren – Kontexte, ed. Eigler, U., Gotter, U., Luraghi, N., and Walter, U.. Darmstadt. 268–86.Google Scholar

MacFarlane, R. 2007. Original Copy. Plagiarism and Originality in Nineteenth-Century Literature. Oxford.Google Scholar

MacLachlan, B. 1993. The Age of Grace: Charis in Early Greek Poetry. Princeton.Google Scholar

McEwen, I.K. 2003. Vitruvius: Writing the Body of Architecture. Cambridge MA.Google Scholar

McGinn, T.A.J. 1998. Prostitution, Sexuality, and the Law in Ancient Rome. Oxford.Google Scholar

McHardy, F. 2008. Revenge in Athenian Culture. London.Google Scholar

McNeil, L. ‘Bridal Cloths, Cover-ups, and Kharis: The “Carpet Scene” in Aeschylus’ Agamemnon.’ Greece and Rome 52: 1–17.Google Scholar

Marin, D. 1956. ‘L’opposizione sotto Augusto e la datazione del Saggio sul sublime.’ In Studi in onore di Aristide Calderini e Roberto Paribeni. Milan. 1.157–85.Google Scholar

Marin, D. 1969. ‘Dionisio di Alicarnasso e il latino.’ In Hommages à Marcel Renard, ed. Bibauw, J.. Brussels. 595–607.Google Scholar

Marincola, J. 1997. Authority and Tradition in Ancient Historiography. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Marincola, J. 2007. ‘Speeches in Classical Historiography.’ In A Companion to Greek and Roman Historiography, ed. Marincola, J.. Oxford. 118–32.Google Scholar

Marincola, J. 2013. ‘Polybius, Phylarchus, and “Tragic History”: A Reconsideration.’ In Polybius and his World: Essays in Memory of F.W. Walbank, ed. Gibson, B. and Harrison, T.. Oxford. 73–90.Google Scholar

Martin, P.M. 1993. ‘De l’universel à l’éternel: la liste des hégémonies dans la préface des A. R.’ Pallas 39: 193–214.Google Scholar

Martin, R.H. and Woodman, A.J. eds. 1989. Tacitus: Annals, Book IV. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Martinho, M. 2010. ‘Caractérisation et noms du style moyen selon Denys d’Halicarnasse.’ In Chiron-Lévy, 2010: 201–20.Google Scholar

Masden, J.M. 2006. ‘Intellectual Resistance to Roman Hegemony and Its Representativity.’ In Rome and the Black Sea Region: Domination, Romanisation, Resistance, ed. Bekker-Nielsen, T.. Aarhus. 63–82.Google Scholar

Mazzucchi, C.M. 2010. Dionisio Longino, Del sublime. Milan.Google Scholar

Miles, G.B. 1995. Reconstructing Early Rome. Ithaca.Google Scholar

Millar, F.G.B. 1987. ‘Polybius between Greece and Rome.’ In Greek Connections: Essays on Culture and Diplomacy, ed. Koumoulides, J.T.A.. Notre Dame. 1–18.Google Scholar

Milnor, K. 2005. Gender, Domesticity, and the Age of Augustus: Inventing Private Life. Oxford.Google Scholar

Momigliano, A. 1990. ‘The Herodotean and the Thucydidean Tradition.’ In The Classical Foundations of Modern Historiography. Berkeley. 29–53.Google Scholar

Moore, D . W. 2017. ‘Learning from experience: Polybius and the progress of Rome.’ Classic Qusterly 67, 132–48.Google Scholar

Mora, F. 1995. Il pensiero storico-religioso antico. Autori greci e Roma I: Dionigi d’Alicarnasso. Rome.Google Scholar

Moussy, C. 1966. Gratia et sa famille. Paris.Google Scholar

Myres, J.L. 1953. Herodotus: The Father of History. Oxford.Google Scholar

Nesselrath, H.-G. 2013. ‘Latein in der griechischen Bildung? Eine Spurensuche vom 2. Jh. v. Chr. bis zum Ende des 3. Jh.s n. Chr.’ In Schubert-Ducrey-Derron, 2013: 281–319.Google Scholar

Nichols, M.F. 2009. Vitruvius and the Rhetoric of Display: Wall Painting, Domestic Architecture and Roman Self-Fashioning. Dissertation. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Noè, E. 1979. ‘Ricerche su Dionigi d’Alicarnasso: la prima stasis a Roma e l’episodio di Coriolano.’ In Ricerche di storiografia greca di età romana. Pisa. 21–116.Google Scholar

Norden, E. 1909. Die antike Kunstprosa vom VI. Jahrhundert v. Chr. bis in die Zeit der Renaissance. 2 vols. 2^nd ed. Leipzig. [First Edition 1898.]Google Scholar

Northwood, S.J. 1998. Four Studies in the Historiography of Early Rome. Dissertation. Manchester.Google Scholar

Oakley, S. P. 1997–2005. A Commentary on Livy, Books vi–x. Oxford.Google Scholar

Oakley, S.P. 2010. ‘Dionysius of Halicarnassus and Livy on the Horatii and the Curiatii.’ In Ancient Historiography and its Contexts: Studies in Honour of A.J. Woodman, ed. Kraus, C.S., Marincola, J., and Pelling, C.. Oxford. 118–38.Google Scholar

Obbink, D. ed. 1995. Philodemus and Poetry. Poetic Theory and Practice in Lucretius, Philodemus and Horace. Oxford.Google Scholar

Ober, J. 1989. Mass and Elite in Democratic Athens. Rhetoric, Ideology, and the Power of the People. Princeton.Google Scholar

Ober, J. 1998. Political Dissent in Democratic Athens: Intellectual Critics of Popular Rule. Princeton.Google Scholar

Ogilvie, R.M. 1965. A Commentary on Livy Books 1–5. Oxford.Google Scholar

O’Hara, J.J. 1997. ‘Virgil’s Style.’ In The Cambridge Companion to Virgil, ed. Martindale, C.. Cambridge. 241–58.Google Scholar

Oliensis, E. 1998. Horace and the Rhetoric of Authority. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Olson, K. 2008. Dress and the Roman Woman: Self-Presentation and Society. Abingdon.Google Scholar

Ooms, S. and de Jonge, C.C. 2013. ‘The Semantics of ΕΝΑΓΩΝΙΟΣ in Greek Literary Criticism.’ Classical Philology 108: 95–110.Google Scholar

Pailler, J.-M. 1988. Bacchanalia. La répression de 186 av. J.-C. à Rome et en Italie. Rome.Google Scholar

Parmentier, E. and Barone, F.P. 2011. Nicolas de Damas. Histoires, Recueil de coutumes, Vie d’Auguste, Autobiographie. Paris.Google Scholar

Pausch, D. 2011. ‘Augustus chlamydatus. Greek Identity and the bios Kaisaros by Nicolaus of Damascus.’ In Schmitz-Wiater 2011a: 143–62.Google Scholar

Pavano, G. 1936. ‘Dionisio d’Alicarnasso, critico di Tucidide.’ Memorie della R. Accademia delle Scienze di Torino 68: 251–91.Google Scholar

Pavano, G. 1958. Dionisio d’Alicarnasso: Saggio su Tucidide. Palermo.Google Scholar

Peirano, I. 2010. ‘Hellenized Romans and Barbarized Greeks: Reading the End of Dionysius of Halicarnassus’ Antiquitates Romanae.’ Journal of Roman Studies 100: 32–53.Google Scholar

Pelling, C. 1996. ‘The Triumviral Period.’ In The Cambridge Ancient History x²: The Augustan Empire, 43 B.C.–A.D. 69, ed. Bowman, A.K., Champlin, E., and Lintott, A.. Cambridge. 1–69.Google Scholar

Pelling, C. 2004. ‘Plutarch on the Outbreak of the Roman Civil War.’ In Festschrift für Gerhard Dobesch zum fünfundsechzigsten Geburtstag am 15. September 2004, ed. Heftner, H. and Tomaschitz, K.. Vienna. 317–27.Google Scholar

Pelling, C. 2007. ‘The Greek Historians of Rome.’ In A Companion to Greek and Roman Historiography, ed. Marincola, J.. Malden, MA. 244–58.Google Scholar

Pelling, C. 2010. ‘“Learning from that Violent Schoolmaster”: Intertextuality and Some Greek Views of Roman Civil War.’ In Citizens of Discord: Rome and its Civil Wars, ed. Breed, B.W., Damon, C., and Rossi, A.. Oxford. 105–18.Google Scholar

Pelling, C. 2011. Plutarch: Caesar. Oxford.Google Scholar

Pelling, C. 2016. ‘Preparing for Posterity: Dionysius and Polybius.’ In Knowing Future Time in and through Greek Historiography, ed. Lianeri, A.. Berlin. 155–73.Google Scholar

Pernot, L. 2006. L’ombre du tigre. Recherches sur la réception de Démosthène. Naples.Google Scholar

Pernot, L. 2015. Epideictic Rhetoric: Questioning the Stakes of Ancient Praise. Austin.Google Scholar

Pohl, K. 1968. Die Lehre von den drei Wortfügungsarten. Untersuchungen zu Dionysios von Halikarnaß, De compositione verborum. Tübingen.Google Scholar

Pollitt, J.J. 1965. The Art of Ancient Greece: Sources and Documents. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Pollitt, J.J. 1974. The Ancient View of Greek Art: Criticism, History, and Terminology. New Haven.Google Scholar

Poma, G. 1984. Tra Legislatori e tiranni: problemi storici e storiografici sull’età delle XII Tavole. Bologna.Google Scholar

Porciani, L. 1997. La Forma proemiale. Pisa.Google Scholar

Porter, J.I. 1995. ‘Οἱ κριτικοί: A Reassessment.’ In Abbenes-Slings-Sluiter, 1995: 83–109.Google Scholar

Porter, J.I. 2006a. ‘Introduction: What Is “Classical” about Classical Antiquity?’ In Classical Pasts. The Classical Traditions of Greece and Rome, ed. Porter, J.I.. Princeton. 1–65.Google Scholar

Porter, J.I. 2006b. ‘Feeling Classical: Classicism and Ancient Literary Criticism.’ In Classical Pasts. The Classical Traditions of Greece and Rome, ed. Porter, J.I.. Princeton. 301–52.Google Scholar

Porter, J.I. 2011. ‘Against λεπτότης: Rethinking Hellenistic Aesthetics.’ In Creating a Hellenistic World, ed. Erskine, A. and Llewellyn-Jones, L.. Swansea. 271–312.Google Scholar

Porter, J.I. 2016. The Sublime in Antiquity. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Pritchett, W.K. 1975. Dionysius of Halicarnassus: On Thucydides. Berkeley.Google Scholar

Quadlbauer, F. 1958. ‘Die genera dicendi bis Plinius dem Jüngeren.’ Wiener Studien 71: 55–111.Google Scholar

Rancière, J. 1994. The Names of History. Minneapolis.Google Scholar

Rancière, J. 2010. Dissensus: On Politics and Aesthetics. New York.Google Scholar

Rawson, E. 1989. ‘Roman Rulers and the Philosophical Adviser.’ In Philosophia Togata: Essays on Philosophy and Roman Society, ed. Griffin, M.T. and Barnes, J.. Oxford. 233–57.Google Scholar

Redfield, J. 1982. ‘Notes on the Greek Wedding.’ Arethusa 15: 181–201.Google Scholar

Rehm, R. Marriage to Death: The Conflation of Wedding and Funeral Rituals in Greek Tragedy. Princeton.Google Scholar

Reinhardt, T. 2013. ‘The Ars Poetica.’ In Brill’s Companion to Horace, ed. Günther, H.-Ch. Leiden. 499–526.Google Scholar

Richard, J.-C. 1993. ‘Sur deux discours programmes: à propos d’ A.R. 3,10,3–11,11.’ Pallas 39: 125–41.Google Scholar

Roberts, W.R. 1900. ‘The Literary Circle of Dionysius of Halicarnassus.’ Classical Review 14: 439–42.Google Scholar

Roberts, W.R. 1901. Dionysius of Halicarnassus. The Three Literary Letters. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Roberts, W.R. 1910. Dionysius of Halicarnassus. On Literary Composition. London.Google Scholar

Robling, F.-H. and Adamietz, J. 1992. ‘Asianismus.’ In Historisches Wörterbuch der Rhetorik, ed. Ueding, G.. Tübingen. 1.1114–21.Google Scholar

Rochette, B. 1997. Le Latin dans le monde grec. Recherches sur la diffusion de la langue et des lettres latines dans les provinces hellénophones de l’Empire romain. Collection Latomus 233. Brussels.Google Scholar

Rolfe, J.C. 1998. Suetonius. Volume 1. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Rudd, N. 1989. Horace: Epistles, Book II and Epistle to the Pisones (‘Ars Poetica’). Cambridge.Google Scholar

Russell, D.A. 1964. ‘Longinus’, On the Sublime. Oxford.Google Scholar

Russell, D.A. 1973. ‘Ars Poetica.’ In Horace, ed. Costa, C.D.N.. London. 113–34.Google Scholar

Russell, D.A. 1979. ‘De Imitatione.’ In Creative Imitation and Latin Literature, ed. West, D. and Woodman, T.. Cambridge. 1–16.Google Scholar

Russell, D.A. 1981. Criticism in Antiquity. London.Google Scholar

Russell, D.A. 1998. ‘The Panegyrists and Their Teachers.’ In The Propaganda of Power: The Role of Panegyric in Late Antiquity, ed. Whitby, M.. Leiden. 17–50.Google Scholar

Russell, D.A. and Winterbottom, M. 1972. Ancient Literary Criticism. The Principal Texts in New Translations. Oxford.Google Scholar

Rutherford, R.B. 2012. Greek Tragic Style: Form, Language and Interpretation. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Rutledge, S.H. 2007. ‘Oratory and Politics in the Empire.’ In A Companion to Roman Rhetoric, ed. Dominik, W.J. and Hall, J.. London. 109–21.Google Scholar

Sacks, K.S. 1983. ‘Historiography in the Rhetorical Works of Dionysius of Halicarnassus.’ Athenaeum 61: 65–87.Google Scholar

Sacks, K.S. 1986. ‘Rhetoric and Speeches in Hellenistic Historiography.’ Athenaeum 64: 383–95.Google Scholar

Saxonhouse, A.W. 2006. Free Speech and Democracy in Ancient Athens. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Scaglione, A. 1972. The Classical Theory of Composition from its Origins to the Present. A Historical Survey. Chapel Hill.Google Scholar

Scheller, P. 1911. De Hellenistica historiae conscribendae arte. Dissertation. Leipzig.Google Scholar

Schenkeveld, D.M. 1964. Studies in Demetrius On Style. Amsterdam.Google Scholar

Schenkeveld, D.M. 1975. ‘Theories of Evaluation in the Rhetorical Treatises of Dionysius of Halicarnassus.’ Museum Philologum Londiniense 1: 93–107.Google Scholar

Schenkeveld, D.M. 1988. ‘Iudicia vulgi: Cicero, De oratore 3.195ff. and Brutus 183ff.’ Rhetorica 6: 291–305.Google Scholar

Schenkeveld, D.M. 2000. ‘The Intended Public of Demetrius’s On Style: The Place of the Treatise in the Hellenistic Educational System.’ Rhetorica 18: 29–48.Google Scholar

Schlikker, F.W. 1940. Hellenistische Vorstellungen von der Schönheit des Bauwerks nach Vitruv. Berlin.Google Scholar

Schmitz, T.A. 2011. ‘The Image of Athens in Diodorus Siculus.’ In Schmitz-Wiater, 2011a: 234–51.Google Scholar

Schmitz, T.A. and Wiater, N. eds. 2011a. The Struggle for Identity. Greeks and their Past in the First Century BCE. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Schmitz, T.A. and Wiater, N. 2011b. ‘Introduction: Approaching Greek Identity.’ In Schmitz-Wiater, 2011a: 15–45.Google Scholar

Scholz, B.I. 1992. Untersuchungen zur Tracht der römischen Matrona. Cologne.Google Scholar

Schubert, P., Ducrey, P., and Derron, P. eds. 2013. Les Grecs héritiers des Romains: huit exposés suivis de discussions. Entretiens sur l’antiquité classique 59. Vandoeuvres / Geneva.Google Scholar

Schubert, W. 1991. ‘Herodot, Livius und die Gestalt des Collatinus in der Lucretia-Geschichte.’ Rheinisches Museum 134: 80–96.Google Scholar

Schütrumpf, E. 2011. ‘“As I thought that the speakers most likely might have spoken…” Thucydides Hist. 1.22.1 on composing speeches.’ Philologus 155: 229–56.Google Scholar

Schultze, C.E. 1986. ‘Dionysius of Halicarnassus and his Audience.’ In Past Perspectives: Studies in Greek and Roman Historical Writing, ed. Moxon, I.S., Smart, J.D., and Woodman, A.J.. Cambridge. 121–41.Google Scholar

Schultze, C.E. 1995. ‘Dionysius of Halicarnassus and Roman Chronology.’ Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 41: 192–214.Google Scholar

Schultze, C.E. 2000. ‘Authority, Originality, and Competence in the Roman Archaeology of Dionysius of Halicarnassus.’ Histos 4: 6–49. (http://research.ncl.ac.uk/histos/Histos_BackIssues2000.html)Google Scholar

Schultze, C.E. 2011. ‘“The Sole Glory of Death”: Dying and Commemoration in Dionysius of Halicarnassus.’ In Memory and Mourning: Studies on Roman Death, ed. Hope, V.M. and Huskinson, J.. Oxford. 78–92.Google Scholar

Schultze, C.E. 2012. ‘Negotiating the Plupast: Dionysius of Halicarnassus and Roman Self-Definition.’ In Time and Narrative in Ancient Historiography: The ‘Plupast’ from Herodotus to Appian, ed. Grethlein, J. and Krebs, C.. Cambridge. 113–38.Google Scholar

Schwartz, E. 1903. ‘Dionysius von Halikarnassos.’ Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumsiwssenschaft V.1: 934–61. [Reprinted: Schwartz, E. 1957. ‘Dionysios von Halikarnassos.’ In Griechische Geschichtschreiber. Leipzig. 319–60.]Google Scholar

Sebesta, J.L. 1998. ‘Women’s Costume and Feminine Civic Morality in Augustan Rome.’ In Gender and the Body in the Ancient Mediterranean, ed. Wyke, M.. Oxford. 105–17.Google Scholar

Sharrock, A.R. 1991. ‘Womanufacture.’ Journal of Roman Studies 81: 36–49.Google Scholar

Small, J.P. 1976. ‘The Death of Lucretia.’ American Journal of Archaeology 80: 349–60.Google Scholar

Solodow, J.B. 1979. ‘Livy and the Story of Horatius, 1.24–26.’ Transactions of the American Philological Association 109: 251–68.Google Scholar

Spawforth, A. 2012. Greece and the Augustan Cultural Revolution. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Spelman, E. 1758. The Roman Antiquities of Dionysius Halicarnassensis, translated into English with Notes and Dissertations. London.Google Scholar

Stephens, S.A. and Ph, Vasunia. eds. 2010. Classics and National Cultures. Oxford.Google Scholar

Swain, S. 1996. Hellenism and Empire. Language, Classicism, and Power in the Greek World AD 50–250. Oxford.Google Scholar

Syed, Y. 2005. Vergil’s Aeneid and the Roman Self. Ann Arbor.Google Scholar

Syme, R. 1939. The Roman Revolution. Oxford.Google Scholar

Tacoma, L. 2016. Moving Romans: Migration to Rome in the Principate. Oxford.Google Scholar

Takács, S.A. 2000. ‘Politics and Religion in the Bacchanalian Affair of 186 BCE.’ Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 100: 301–10.Google Scholar

Tanner, J. 2006. The Invention of Art History in Ancient Greece: Religion, Society and Artistic Rationalisation. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Thomas, Y. 1984. ‘Vitae necisque potestas: Le père, la cité, la mort.’ In Du châtiment dans la cité: supplices corporels et peine de mort dans le monde antique. Table ronde organisée par l’École française de Rome. Rome. 499–548.Google Scholar

Too, Y.L. 1995. The Rhetoric of Identity in Isocrates: Text, Power, Pedagogy. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Treggiari, S. 1991. Roman Marriage. Iusti Coniuges from the Time of Cicero to the Time of Ulpian. Oxford.Google Scholar

Turcan, R. 1995. ‘Le Classicisme Augustéen.’ In L’Art Romain dans L’Histoire. Paris. 83–105.Google Scholar

Ungern-Sternberg, J. von. 2005. ‘The Formation of the “Annalistic Tradition”: The Example of the Decemvirate.’ In Social Struggles in Ancient Rome, ed. Raaflaub, K.A.. Oxford. 75–97.Google Scholar

Usher, S. 1965. ‘Individual Characterization.’ Eranos 63: 99–119.Google Scholar

Usher, S. 1974. Dionysius of Halicarnassus: The Critical Essays in Two Volumes. Vol. 1. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Usher, S. 1982. ‘The Style of Dionysius of Halicarnassus in the Antiquitates Romanae.’ Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt 2.30.1: 817–38.Google Scholar

Usher, S. 1985. Dionysius of Halicarnassus: The Critical Essays in Two Volumes. Vol. 2. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Vandiver, E. 1999. ‘The Founding Mothers of Livy’s Rome: The Sabine Women and Lucretia.’ In The Eye Expanded: Life and the Arts in Greco-Roman Antiquity, ed. Titchener, F.B. and Moorton, R.F.. Berkeley. 206–32.Google Scholar

Verdin, H. 1974. ‘La fonction de l’histoire selon Denys d’Halicarnasse.’ Ancient Society 5: 289–307.Google Scholar

Wagner-Hasel, B. 2012. ‘Tria himatia. Vêtement et mariage en Grèce ancienne.’ In Vêtements antiques: s’ habiller, se déshabiller dans les mondes antiques, ed. Gherchanoc, F. and Huet, V.. Arles. 39–46.Google Scholar

Walbank, F.W. 1957–79. A Historical Commentary on Polybius. 3 vols. Oxford.Google Scholar

Walker, A.D. 1993. ‘Enargeia and the Spectator in Greek Historiography.’ Transactions of the American Philological Association 123: 353–77.Google Scholar

Wallace-Hadrill, A. 2008. Rome’s Cultural Revolution. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Walt, S. 1997. Der Historiker C. Licinius Macer. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Wardle, D. 2014. Suetonius: Life of Augustus. Oxford.Google Scholar

Weaire, G. 2002. ‘The Relationship between Dionysius of Halicarnassus’ De Imitatione and Epistula ad Pompeium.’ Classical Philology 97: 351–9.Google Scholar

Weaire, G. 2005. ‘Dionysius of Halicarnassus’ Professional Situation and the De Thucydide.’ Phoenix 59: 246–66.Google Scholar

Weaire, G. 2012. ‘How to Talk to a Roman Student: The Teacher’s Authority in Dionysius of Halicarnassus’ De compositione uerborum.’ Illinois Classical Studies 35–36:46–67.Google Scholar

Weissenberger, M. 2003. ‘Lysias 1905–2000.’ Lustrum 45: 7–166.Google Scholar

Welles, C.B. 1934. Royal Correspondence in the Hellenistic Period: A Study in Greek Epigraphy. New Haven.Google Scholar

White, H. 1973. Metahistory: The Historical Imagination in 19th-Century Europe. Baltimore.Google Scholar

White, H. 1978. ‘Interpretation in History.’ In Tropics of Discourse. Baltimore. 51–80.Google Scholar

Whitmarsh, T. 2001. Greek Literature and the Roman Empire. The Politics of Imitation. Oxford.Google Scholar

Whitmarsh, T. 2009. ‘Greece and Rome.’ In The Oxford Handbook of Hellenic Studies, ed. Boys-Stones, G., Graziosi, B., and Vasunia, Ph. Oxford. 114–28.Google Scholar

Whitmarsh, T. 2011. ‘Greek Poets and Roman Patrons in the Late Republic and Early Empire.’ In Schmitz-Wiater, 2011a: 197–212.Google Scholar

Whitmarsh, T. 2013. Beyond the Second Sophistic. Adventures in Greek Postclassicism. Berkeley.Google Scholar

Whitmarsh, T. 2016. Battling the Gods. Atheism in the Ancient World. London.Google Scholar

Wiater, N. 2011a. The Ideology of Classicism. Language, History, and Identity in Dionysius of Halicarnassus. Berlin.Google Scholar

Wiater, N. 2011b. ‘Writing Roman History – Shaping Greek Identity: The Ideology of Historiography in Dionysius of Halicarnassus.’ In Schmitz-Wiater, 2011a: 61–91.Google Scholar

Wiater, N. 2014. Dionysius von Halikarnass: Römische Frühgeschichte Band 1: Bücher 1 bis 3. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Wiater, N. 2018a. ‘Getting Over Athens: Re-writing Hellenicity in the Early Roman History of Dionysius of Halicarnassus.’ In The Hellenistic Reception of Classical Athenian Democracy and Political Thought, ed. B. Gray and M. Canevaro. Oxford. 209–35.Google Scholar

Wiater, N. 2018b. Dionysius von Halikarnass: Römische Frühgeschichte Band 2: Bücher 4 bis 6. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U. von 1900. ‘Asianismus und Atticismus.’ Hermes 35: 1–52.Google Scholar

Williams, R. and Orrom, M. 1954. A Preface to Film. London.Google Scholar

Williams, R. 1977. Marxism and Literature. Oxford.Google Scholar

Williams, R. 2005. Culture and Materialism: Selected Essays. London.Google Scholar

Wiseman, T.P. 1979. Clio’s Cosmetics. Leicester.Google Scholar

Wiseman, T.P. 2002. ‘History, Poetry, and Annales.’ In Clio and the Poets: Augustan Poetry and the Traditions of Ancient Historiography, ed. Levene, D.S. and Nelis, D.P.. Leiden. 331–62.Google Scholar

Wiseman, T.P. 2008a. Unwritten Rome. Exeter.Google Scholar

Wiseman, T.P. 2008b. ‘The Legend of Lucius Brutus.’ In Wiseman, 2008a: 292–305.Google Scholar

Wiseman, T.P. 2008c. ‘Roman Republic, Year One.’ In Wiseman, 2008a: 306–19.Google Scholar

Wisse, J. 1995. ‘Greeks, Romans, and the Rise of Atticism.’ In Abbenes-Slings-Sluiter, 1995: 65–82.Google Scholar

Woerther, F. 2013. Apollodore de Pergame. Théodore de Gadara. Fragments et témoignages. Paris.Google Scholar

Woerther, F. 2015. Caecilius de Calè-Actè. Fragments et témoignages. Paris.Google Scholar

Woodman, A.J. 1988. Rhetoric in Classical Historiography. Four Studies. London and Sydney.Google Scholar

Woolf, G. 1994. ‘Becoming Roman, Staying Greek.’ Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 40: 116–35.Google Scholar

Wooten, C.W. 1975. ‘Le développement du style asiatique pendant l’époque hellénistique.’ Revue des études grecques 88: 94–104.Google Scholar

Wooten, C.W. 1987. Hermogenes: On Types of Style. Chapel Hill.Google Scholar

Wooten, C.W. 1989. ‘Dionysius of Halicarnassus and Hermogenes on the Style of Demosthenes.’ American Journal of Philology 110: 576–88.Google Scholar

Worman, N. 2015. Landscape and the Spaces of Metaphor in Ancient Literary Theory and Criticism. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Wysłucha, K. 2012. ‘The Role of Music in Ancient Rhetoric.’ Papers on Rhetoric 11: 224–36.Google Scholar

Yunis, H. 1996. Taming Democracy: Models of Political Rhetoric in Classical Athens. Ithaca.Google Scholar

Zanker, P. 1987. Augustus und die Macht der Bilder. Munich.Google Scholar

Zetzel, J.E.G. 1995. Cicero: De Re Publica, Selections. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Zizek, S. 1997. The Plague of Fantasies. London.Google Scholar